I'm sure most of you, at least those of you that live in the US, have heard about the tragic shooting at the Nebraska mall yesterday. What can you say, truly awful. My heart goes out to the families that were affected, as I sure is the case with everyone.
Certainly not looking to make light of the tragedy or use it as a springboard to a much more glib and pointless conversation, but it prompted a discussion between my wife and I that would benefit from some more input. Here's the question: It is referred to by most news services as a "massacre," but was it? If not, what constitutes a "massacre?" Certainly, a "massacre" implies an event where multiple people die, but is there more to it than that?
She seemed to think that more than 9 people needed to die for it to qualify, where I think that the fact that the killing was indiscriminate, senseless and effectively random pushes it into that category, provided there are multiple deaths. Moreover, I think that even without that, 9 people dying is enough to get that unwelcome title.
So...
1. Is 9 deaths enough to qualify as a massacre?
2. Is it strictly a matter of numbers, or is there something about the nature of the act that enters into it?
Thoughts? I know this probably seems like a heartless discussion to have in the wake of something like this, but the root discussion was about whether the media was being overly sensationalistic by referring to it in that fashion, FWIW.
Certainly not looking to make light of the tragedy or use it as a springboard to a much more glib and pointless conversation, but it prompted a discussion between my wife and I that would benefit from some more input. Here's the question: It is referred to by most news services as a "massacre," but was it? If not, what constitutes a "massacre?" Certainly, a "massacre" implies an event where multiple people die, but is there more to it than that?
She seemed to think that more than 9 people needed to die for it to qualify, where I think that the fact that the killing was indiscriminate, senseless and effectively random pushes it into that category, provided there are multiple deaths. Moreover, I think that even without that, 9 people dying is enough to get that unwelcome title.
So...
1. Is 9 deaths enough to qualify as a massacre?
2. Is it strictly a matter of numbers, or is there something about the nature of the act that enters into it?
Thoughts? I know this probably seems like a heartless discussion to have in the wake of something like this, but the root discussion was about whether the media was being overly sensationalistic by referring to it in that fashion, FWIW.
definitely a massacre no matter how you look at it.
Comment